Welcome to Windows 8.1: Ars readers react

We also talk illicit phone videos and the prices of game consoles.

Testing out pressure sensitivity on a tablet at Microsoft's BUILD conference.

Ars Technica

This week, Microsoft held its annual BUILD conference for developers at the Moscone Center in San Francisco. Ars had Peter Bright on the scene when the company announced the new features that will be added into Windows 8.1. In the comments section beneath Bright's article, What does Windows 8.1 offer to desktop die-hards?, there were some mixed opinions about how meaningful Microsoft's changes will prove for desktop users.

dkazaz thinks the changes don't really solve the problem that Windows 8 really has: that the OS is trying to be all things for all devices. "I don't understand why the use of the two interfaces needs to be intermingled," dkazaz writes. "I'm quite interested in a hybrid desktop/touch OS. I just don't want to use a touch interface with a keyboard/mouse and I don't want (obviously) to have to use desktop elements on a touchscreen... Merging the two forces compromises on both. That doesn't mean that you can't have both in the same OS as long as you have clean switching between them. Is that really so hard for MS to figure out?"

robotic_tourist was a bit more charitable about the design choice: "I think the Start Screen is the new version of the ActiveX desktop. I never saw it used to good effect but it allowed animated widgets connected to the Web to display info on the desktop. What do most people have on their desktop? Application launcher icons. What do you get if you cross application launcher icons with animated widgets sucking down information from the Web? The Start Screen. Yes we laughed when we first saw the ActiveX Desktop, but now may be the time when it finally fulfills its potential!"

g0blue also had some positive things to say about 8.1's changes. "Another welcome addition to 8.1: Invoking the search charm (Win+Q) from the desktop no longer switches to the all-apps start screen. Instead you can search for apps (or files, webpages, etc.) from a sidebar on the desktop. Although the hot-key is slightly different, you can now search-launch apps without losing the view of your desktop or installing any third party utilities."

Not everyone was quite so positive.dagamer34 thought the changes were trivial and hoped there would be more to come. "Hopefully people can stop complaining about the Start Button/Menu and move onto far more important things that should be addressed in Windows 8/8.1."

Video Phone

This week we also heard a rather strange story about a young man in South Carolina who called in a fake bomb threat to get his girlfriend out of school for the day. The man was 20 and his girlfriend was 16, and while the legal age of consent in South Carolina is 16, federal law classifies sex videos with people under 18 as child porn. Unfortunately, the couple recorded just such a video on the phone he used to call in the bomb threat. Now he's serving 18 months in jail and will be marked as a sex offender for life.

One twist in Nate Anderson's story, Legal sex + smartphone video = child pornography, is that the issue was elevated to a federal level because the young man's smartphone was made by HTC. This meant it was classified as a production tool that has been exchanged through interstate and foreign commerce. mdporter was incensed about this. "Making him a convicted sex offender and putting him on an offender database for life due to a video found on a found is an incredible overreach. The bomb threats were stupid and he deserves jail time for those, but the sex part is just malicious prosecution. And hey Federal assholes, it is not possible to buy a cell phone made in America."

Many times with the law, the intent isn't the sole concern. The law itself will tell you whether intent is an element of the crime. In this particular case, because of what they are trying to prevent (i.e. images and videos of underage children in sexual situations), intent doesn't matter.

Now, of course, the judge can be reasonable in his sentencing if he genuinely believes that the person made a stupid mistake. If I were the judge, I would have given the kid probation and skipped any sex offender charges.

Another thing, WAAAAAAAAAY too many young people are making sex videos. They don't understand the consequences of these things. Just my opinion.

On one level I do feel bad for the guy. He did nothing (that he knew) was illegal with his girlfriend.

However on the other hand he called in a bomb threat to a high school...umm...yeah that was bad. Does no one just play hooky anymore?? "Yes, Jessica is sick today and will not be coming in." Isn't that easier than a bomb threat?

Frankly this guy is lucky to have a judge like this who could see the forest from the trees and made the best attempt he could and getting the guy punished for what he deserved to be punished for. It is unfortunate he couldn't do much about the sex offender label though, that is still just too extreme.

Money, Money, Money (and consoles)

Aurich Lawson / Thinkstock

Finally, Jonathan Gitlin and Kyle Orland analyzed the prices of game consoles since 1977 and how they've changed with inflation. With the Xbox One and the PS4 both recently announced, it's clear that Microsoft's is more expensive than Sony's, but will that remain true in a year or two after the companies have some time to cut prices? Check out Are the PS4 and Xbox One really that expensive, historically?to get a look at our handy graphs.

Beneath the story, Ars commenters found a lot of nuance in the numbers to talk about. Wickwick wrote, "An amazing reminder of just how bad inflation was in the late 70's-early 80's. The 2600 and NES sold for almost the same dollar amount ($200 and $175 respectively) but in 2013 equivalent that's $768 for the 2600 and $432 for the NES just eight years apart."

And while Orland and Gitlin found that the price of today's consoles seems reasonable to consoles in the past, sabarjp thinks there's another variable to consider. "Inflation alone does not tell the whole tale as to why people are up in arms with pricing. More tech and gadgets demand our entertainment dollars these days ($600 phones, $80 plans, expensive broadband, rent/food prices rising faster than wages, stagnant wages, etc). Things like DLC, expensive peripherals, and uncertainty over imminent tech (like display technology) make pricey consoles a tough pill." SonicHgHog went with a similar line of thinking: "Remember the value back then too. You did not just get a system, you also got a game or games included with the system. My Atari 2600 Came with Combat and two controllers. When the 360 came out you did not get a full free game and you only got one controller."

And Thisismyarsname wanted to see the numbers reflecting American purchasing power. "One slight problem with using real dollars in comparison is that it assumes that average purchasing power has stayed the same. So yes, the prices might be relatively similar over the long run, but the ability of people to buy them has been curtailed by the recession and rising inequality."

I got 8.1 running on my Thinkpad Tablet, the tablet experience is much better, the music app, store and settings are welcome additions to name a few.

On the desktop, the new functionalities like boot to desktop are a step in the right direction, but the Windows 7 start menu has some functionalities which I still miss like the jump lists for recently used programs, easy access to places like network, computer, control panel, etc. Some of those are available in other places in Windows 8.1, but not all. What I miss the most in the all apps screen vs the start menu is folders. If you could just get the category titles to show and not the individual items in the all apps screen, I'd be fine with that. I got desktop programs that create over 10 entries in the start menu under Windows 7, but they're all tucked away nicely in a folder which makes navigating the start menu easier. In the all apps screen, they show up all the time making for a lot of clutter.

Most people don't even look at their desktop. It's cluttered and unusable with automatically placed shortcuts. Should the users who actually take some pride in keeping their desktop clean (mine only has the Recycle Bin and a couple of shortcuts that I don't want on the taskbar) pay for the lazy one's incompetence?

The answer should be 'no'. That's also not what Microsoft is doing. They're trying to bring the 'Home Screen' modality from portable devices to the Desktop computer. For portable devices where you can only really do one thing at a time a [visually] modal home screen is fine.

For a desktop OS that's not. I shouldn't be forced to switch to a visually modal application that covers my screen and destroys the entire concept of spatiality in application switching. That's what the Start button preserves, your visual concept of your workflow, preventing a conceptual context switch from occurring. The Start Menu inherently preserves the spatial concept of your workflow. Your active applications never leave the screen, even if you can't interact with them while the Start Menu is up.

I'm fine with the Start Screen on a tablet. I'm fine with the ModernUI design on a tablet (or even the phone, where it originated). They shouldn't be repeating the mistakes of the past only the other way around though. One UI to fit all won't work. It will never work. Anyone who says it does work is either kidding themselves, living in a dreamworld, or lying.

Running 8.1 on Acer w500. The thng I like most is running 50:50 IE11 split. This works rally well, and I have ars on the left, and my company Gmail on he right. Yes, nothing new for desktop browsers, but great on a tablet.

Also like having calc on the left with my desktop apps on the right. Flexible split between any apps on a tablet is just freaky cool and useful.

Also, love the 'show more tiles' setting, making my start screen more dense.

dkazaz thinks the changes don't really solve the problem that Windows 8 really has: that the OS is trying to be all things for all devices. "I don't understand why the use of the two interfaces needs to be intermingled." dkazaz writes. "I'm quite interested in a hybrid desktop/touch OS. I just don't want to use a touch interface with a keyboard/mouse and I don't want (obviously) to have to use desktop elements on a touchscreen... Merging the two forces compromises on both. That doesn't mean that you can't have both in the same OS as long as you have clean switching between them. Is that really so hard for MS to figure out?"

Completely agree with Mr. Dkazaz, the best approach in design for Windows 8 should have been an OS that can detect while is trying to install if you have a computer with touch screen capability or not and install the modern UI OS aka metro, or just the desktop OS. Why Microsoft think is a good idea to have in a tablet a desktop OS? I think that can kill battery life, u have two systems in a machine.

dkazaz thinks the changes don't really solve the problem that Windows 8 really has: that the OS is trying to be all things for all devices. "I don't understand why the use of the two interfaces needs to be intermingled." dkazaz writes. "I'm quite interested in a hybrid desktop/touch OS. I just don't want to use a touch interface with a keyboard/mouse and I don't want (obviously) to have to use desktop elements on a touchscreen... Merging the two forces compromises on both. That doesn't mean that you can't have both in the same OS as long as you have clean switching between them. Is that really so hard for MS to figure out?"

Completely agree with Mr. Dkazaz, the best approach in design for Windows 8 should have been an OS that can detect while is trying to install if you have a computer with touch screen capability or not and install the modern UI OS aka metro, or just the desktop OS. Why Microsoft think is a good idea to have in a tablet a desktop OS? I think that can kill battery life, u have two systems in a machine.

Just a switch somewhere in the settings where you can choose if you want the new Windows 8 experience or the more traditional desktop experience would have been nice. It would have given them time to work the kinks out until the next major revision of Windows while preventing the alienation of a part of their customers.

It is inferior to Windows 7 with a Keyboard a Mouse and two large wide screen monitors.

End of conversation.

#1 I don't want to touch my nice clean monitor.

#2 I don't like tiny computers like tablets, I can't touch type on one.

#3 I like to pick and choose my input device, touch isn't anything useful for what I use a computer for.I can change my mouse and monitor as often as I want and program them without buying a whole new tablet to upgrade something.

What does Windows 8.1 offer anyone who knows how to use Windows XP, or 7?

Most people don't even look at their desktop. It's cluttered and unusable with automatically placed shortcuts. Should the users who actually take some pride in keeping their desktop clean (mine only has the Recycle Bin and a couple of shortcuts that I don't want on the taskbar) pay for the lazy one's incompetence?

The answer should be 'no'. That's also not what Microsoft is doing. They're trying to bring the 'Home Screen' modality from portable devices to the Desktop computer. For portable devices where you can only really do one thing at a time a [visually] modal home screen is fine.

For a desktop OS that's not. I shouldn't be forced to switch to a visually modal application that covers my screen and destroys the entire concept of spatiality in application switching. That's what the Start button preserves, your visual concept of your workflow, preventing a conceptual context switch from occurring. The Start Menu inherently preserves the spatial concept of your workflow. Your active applications never leave the screen, even if you can't interact with them while the Start Menu is up.

I'm fine with the Start Screen on a tablet. I'm fine with the ModernUI design on a tablet (or even the phone, where it originated). They shouldn't be repeating the mistakes of the past only the other way around though. One UI to fit all won't work. It will never work. Anyone who says it does work is either kidding themselves, living in a dreamworld, or lying.

it WILL work if microsofts plan is killing the pc.. and replacing it with tablets.

It is inferior to Windows 7 with a Keyboard a Mouse and two large wide screen monitors.

End of conversation.

I use Windows 8 a keyboard, a mouse, and with two large wide screen monitors. I use Start8, so I haven't seen the Metro interface in a long time. Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 in many important ways, such as improved storage support, better file management, and better security.

And there's that Metro thing that if I was running a tablet I would probably like. But like I said, I don't use it.

You don't need to either.

Your type of complaint boils down to "I can't stand this extra thing that's been added that I don't want to use and don't have to".

It is inferior to Windows 7 with a Keyboard a Mouse and two large wide screen monitors.

End of conversation.

I use Windows 8 a keyboard, a mouse, and with two large wide screen monitors. I use Start8, so I haven't seen the Metro interface in a long time. Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 in many important ways, such as improved storage support, better file management, and better security.

And there's that Metro thing that if I was running a tablet I would probably like. But like I said, I don't use it.

You don't need to either.

Your type of complaint boils down to "I can't stand this extra thing that's been added that I don't want to use and don't have to".

Most people don't even look at their desktop. It's cluttered and unusable with automatically placed shortcuts. Should the users who actually take some pride in keeping their desktop clean (mine only has the Recycle Bin and a couple of shortcuts that I don't want on the taskbar) pay for the lazy one's incompetence?

It is only windows desktops that are cluttered. Linux desktops (KDE & Gnome) have removed all the clutter. There is still a desktop folder, but at most lives as widget which can be removed if so desired.

In a sense I feel sorry for Windows8. Microsoft had a great opportunity to leave the clutter behind, and build a proper desktop & tablet OS, but they should have copied from more modern OS for better desktop workflow. Like actually opening multiple apps in the background instead of the first clicked one to pop over my last opened application. Multiple desktops to organize my workflow better. Keyboard activated application & command launchers instead of grabbing for the mouse. With that they could have moved away from the start button without frustrating the hell out their current user base (think Mac command key, but using to access the whole desktop).

Now that would have been amazing, and possibly the only real incentive for me to use windows 8. After all the work to get performance out windows, and to waste it on a broken desktop and tablet metaphor. It is really a shame for a company such as Microsoft with all their money, not to learn from their own past mistakes.

What does Windows 8.1 offer anyone who knows how to use Windows XP, or 7?

Not one damn thing.

I think what you mean is, "What does Windows 8.1 offer anyone who knows how to use Windows XP or 7 but doesn't actually understand anything about OSes work"?

Anyone stupid enough to suggest that Windows 8.1 offers no improvements over XP (XP for god's sake?) really has no business commenting on it.

But I guess if things like security, speed, boot time, power management, malware protection, file management, device management, and so forth aren't important to you, then by all means, keep using XP or 7.

For what it's worth, I use 8.1 and boot directly to the desktop. Visually it's practically identical to the Windows 7 machine I use at work. Only better.

dkazaz thinks the changes don't really solve the problem that Windows 8 really has: that the OS is trying to be all things for all devices. "I don't understand why the use of the two interfaces needs to be intermingled." dkazaz writes. "I'm quite interested in a hybrid desktop/touch OS. I just don't want to use a touch interface with a keyboard/mouse and I don't want (obviously) to have to use desktop elements on a touchscreen... Merging the two forces compromises on both. That doesn't mean that you can't have both in the same OS as long as you have clean switching between them. Is that really so hard for MS to figure out?"

It's not complicated. It's simple:

Microsoft is assuming (correctly) that one day everybody will use touch screens, and keyboards/mice will be restricted to "pro" users and geeks.

Microsoft is assuming (also correctly) that touchscreen software has to be designed from the ground up against GUI API's that are also designed from the ground up. That's what metro is.

They also feel the fastest way to get everybody moving towards that future is to make the touchscreen interface available to everyone now, including people who use a keyboard/mouse. They are trying to move quicker than many of their existing user base would like because Android and iOS tablets are selling like crazy and Windows might be cut out of the consumer/business market and shoved into the "pro" and "geek" market, where they're already not doing so well against Mac OS X.

Providing Metro to keyboard/mice users is a gutsy and risky move to try and block Android or iOS from becoming the next mainstream operating system. I think it's going to work, and we will end up with three popular operating systems instead of just one.

It is inferior to Windows 7 with a Keyboard a Mouse and two large wide screen monitors.

End of conversation.

I use Windows 8 a keyboard, a mouse, and with two large wide screen monitors. I use Start8, so I haven't seen the Metro interface in a long time. Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 in many important ways, such as improved storage support, better file management, and better security.

And there's that Metro thing that if I was running a tablet I would probably like. But like I said, I don't use it.

You don't need to either.

Your type of complaint boils down to "I can't stand this extra thing that's been added that I don't want to use and don't have to".

One thing I don't understand about Microsoft is their insistence that one OS should handle both touch and keyboard/mouse interfaces.

This is particularly puzzling if we consider the fact that Windows comes in a multitude of editions from basic and home premium, all the way up to ultimate.

So what's wrong with also having a Windows 8 tablet edition and a Windows 8 desktop edition?

Apple has the right idea by keeping Mac OS X and iOS separate. I don't understand why Microsoft is so determined in trying to unite two totally different interface paradigms. So far the results are less than stellar.

You made an annoying and incorrect statement, then declared "End of conversation". Setting aside Metro, there major improvements in boot time, security, device support, storage systems, performance...the list goes on.

Um...you understand that I said the opposite of what you said, right? And that I intended this to counter what you said, right?

Microsoft is assuming (correctly) that one day everybody will use touch screens, and keyboards/mice will be restricted to "pro" users and geeks.

I have to disagree with your assumption. Unless there's a tactile touch screen coming soon, the keyboard will still be the primary medium of inputting information in a computer for the forseeable future.

Why? because typing is way faster that speech, and you don't have to look at the keys while you're typing - you can find them by touch, and you can tell when they are pressed.

The iPad has an excellent virtual keyboard, and yet it's not as convenient as a 'real' keyboard. I still make a lot of mistakes on the iPad even after years of use, just because the keyboard layout and keys positions change slightly when you change case or input language.

And keyboards are not only for business use either. Just imagine trying to play Call of Duty on a PC without a tactile keyboard.

What does Windows 8.1 offer anyone who knows how to use Windows XP, or 7?

Not one damn thing.

I think what you mean is, "What does Windows 8.1 offer anyone who knows how to use Windows XP or 7 but doesn't actually understand anything about OSes work"?

Anyone stupid enough to suggest that Windows 8.1 offers no improvements over XP (XP for god's sake?) really has no business commenting on it.

100% agreed. I haven't done the 8.1 upgrade yet because I'm not sure if the "new" start button is a proper replacement for the add-on software I already have, and I'm not sure if it will mess with some of the VPN software I am required to use.

I found Windows 8.1 interesting, but a few too many performance issues compared to Windows 8. Additionally, IE 11 has many compatibility issues still.(understanding it is a beta) That being said, I do not enjoy it nearly as well as Windows 8 with Start8 and Modern Mix. The two Modern UI apps I do run (Kindle and Accuweather) I enjoy having in windows on the desktop.

That said, I found the new All Apps and Start Screen functions interesting in that they are much more configurable. That said, for the desktop nothing beats the start menu and windows modern UI apps. Everything just flows.

As for the tablet, when Amazon starts supporting periodicals in it's modern UI app, and more modern UI apps have at least as many functions as their Android counterparts, then and only then will I sell my Asus Transformer for a Windows tablet.

What I miss the most in the all apps screen vs the start menu is folders. If you could just get the category titles to show and not the individual items in the all apps screen, I'd be fine with that.

Click the "-" at the bottom right of the screen to zoom out to just category headings. Ctrl-(minus sign) or pinch out if you have a touchscreen will do the same thing.

From that cursor or click to your category.

Not exactly what I'd prefer, but I'll take it, thanks. It works great on touch, meh with a mouse and kb. The clutter still remains, but at least, you can get to the right place in that clutter.

I also agree that there are improvements over 7 under the hood that are worth it and the new UI didn't prevent me from installing it on my laptop, but there is definitely room for improvement on the UI front, 8.1 is a big step in the right direction for metro and a smaller one for desktop imo.

Microsoft has lost me as a customer. To Apple.Yes, I've had it with MS' endeavour to shove s*** down their users' throat. Win 8 was the last straw. I still have a very expensive gaming PC running on Win7, but my productivity system is a Macbook Air now. I'm done with Microsoft products.

Microsoft has lost me as a customer. To Apple.Yes, I've had it with MS' endeavour to shove s*** down their users' throat. Win 8 was the last straw. I still have a very expensive gaming PC running on Win7, but my productivity system is a Macbook Air now. I'm done with Microsoft products.

You don't see the irony in that statement? The fact that Apple cuts OS X compatibility after 5 years is OK, but MS providing XP support/security updates for 13 years is bad? That Apple refuses to provide driver/bios/uefi updates for older 64-bit compatible machines (older Mac Pros) to be able to run the newer OSes is OK? That they don't officially support or offer BluRay drives (though there are unsupported work arounds)?

How is Apple not trying to "shove s*** down their users' throat [sic]"? Really?

Microsoft has lost me as a customer. To Apple.Yes, I've had it with MS' endeavour to shove s*** down their users' throat. Win 8 was the last straw. I still have a very expensive gaming PC running on Win7, but my productivity system is a Macbook Air now. I'm done with Microsoft products.

You don't see the irony in that statement? The fact that Apple cuts OS X compatibility after 5 years is OK, but MS providing XP support/security updates for 13 years is bad? That Apple refuses to provide driver/bios/uefi updates for older 64-bit compatible machines (older Mac Pros) to be able to run the newer OSes is OK? That they don't officially support or offer BluRay drives (though there are unsupported work arounds)?

How is Apple not trying to "shove s*** down their users' throat [sic]"? Really?

Well that's your point of view. I personally don't use a MacPro and don't care about Bluray drives. My Iphone 3GS on the other hand still got updates until recently. The OSX Updates are mostly minor anyways, and you knew beforehand that you were buying into a system that is quite the opposite of 'open'.

Me on the other hand I'm sick of non sense like Metro that no one uses but everyone seems to defend for some reason. It's bloody inconsistent, cumbersome and annoying to use on a desktop. Need some settings or search? Switch back to Metro. Wanna run a desktop app? Switch to the Desktop. That's some great user experience right there.

Not to mention the countless bugs I've been getting over the past two years due to Windows Update. I've been getting an error message every time I want to copy/cut a file ever since the last windows update. And file sharing over network almost never works, unless I use hamachi. And most Wintel laptops are just cheap compared to a Mac with noisy fans & dysfunctional touchpads.

Ofc, as a power user (Photoshop, rendering, etc.) or power gamer you're much better off building your own rig. I don't like Apple's idea of what the user wants in terms of hardware either. The new MacPro won't be user upgradable and will cost a ton. The 13 incher laptops have no dedicated GPUs, which is a shame. I wonder why Apple launches no "Gamer" desktop system with upgradable hardware. Oh and don't forget about the iMac. Once that thing turns old, you'll exchange that beautiful screen with it, and that's ridiculous.

But I prefer that s**** over MS' s**** to be honest. Each his own I guess.

It is inferior to Windows 7 with a Keyboard a Mouse and two large wide screen monitors.

End of conversation.

I use Windows 8 a keyboard, a mouse, and with two large wide screen monitors. I use Start8, so I haven't seen the Metro interface in a long time. Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 in many important ways, such as improved storage support, better file management, and better security.

And there's that Metro thing that if I was running a tablet I would probably like. But like I said, I don't use it.

You don't need to either.

Your type of complaint boils down to "I can't stand this extra thing that's been added that I don't want to use and don't have to".

This is not what I would've wanted to fix the UI in windows 8. Ask users the first time the OS is ran which "mode" they want to run it (perhaps have Tablet mode, Mixed mode and Legacy mode) with one mode being exactly windows 7 behaviour, including the start menu JUST like in windows 7 with the log off, shut down etc. on it, only showing you non full screen apps in the menu. Microsoft could learn a lot from people that make UI on AAA video games, I got this idea from those games with the control options (on PC) that offer you mixed Controller/keyboard interfaces, full keyboard, or controller only.

Me on the other hand I'm sick of non sense like Metro that no one uses but everyone seems to defend for some reason. It's bloody inconsistent, cumbersome and annoying to use on a desktop. Need some settings or search? Switch back to Metro. Wanna run a desktop app? Switch to the Desktop. That's some great user experience right there.

Everyone is trying to defend Metro? What reality are you living in? Also, with 8.1, you can right-click on the Start button and go to Control panel. Pretty much every setting for non-Metro things still live there. If you want to search, the search box in Explorer and Control Panel windows still works as before. The Search charm doesn't dismiss your desktop, either, you get desktop program and file results in the flyout.

It is inferior to Windows 7 with a Keyboard a Mouse and two large wide screen monitors.

End of conversation.

I use Windows 8 a keyboard, a mouse, and with two large wide screen monitors. I use Start8, so I haven't seen the Metro interface in a long time. Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 in many important ways, such as improved storage support, better file management, and better security.

And there's that Metro thing that if I was running a tablet I would probably like. But like I said, I don't use it.

You don't need to either.

Your type of complaint boils down to "I can't stand this extra thing that's been added that I don't want to use and don't have to".

It is inferior to Windows 7 with a Keyboard a Mouse and two large wide screen monitors.

End of conversation.

I use Windows 8 a keyboard, a mouse, and with two large wide screen monitors. I use Start8, so I haven't seen the Metro interface in a long time. Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 in many important ways, such as improved storage support, better file management, and better security.

And there's that Metro thing that if I was running a tablet I would probably like. But like I said, I don't use it.

You don't need to either.

Your type of complaint boils down to "I can't stand this extra thing that's been added that I don't want to use and don't have to".

Microsoft has lost me as a customer. To Apple.Yes, I've had it with MS' endeavour to shove s*** down their users' throat. Win 8 was the last straw. I still have a very expensive gaming PC running on Win7, but my productivity system is a Macbook Air now. I'm done with Microsoft products.

You don't see the irony in that statement? The fact that Apple cuts OS X compatibility after 5 years is OK, but MS providing XP support/security updates for 13 years is bad? That Apple refuses to provide driver/bios/uefi updates for older 64-bit compatible machines (older Mac Pros) to be able to run the newer OSes is OK? That they don't officially support or offer BluRay drives (though there are unsupported work arounds)?

How is Apple not trying to "shove s*** down their users' throat [sic]"? Really?

Quote:

The fact that Apple cuts OS X compatibility after 5 years is OK, but MS providing XP support/security updates for 13 years is bad?

It appears that based on this that Apple and Microsoft generally support their OSes for similar amounts of time with Xp being an outlier due to the failure of Vista to obtain wide adoption.

Quote:

That Apple refuses to provide driver/bios/uefi updates for older 64-bit compatible machines (older Mac Pros) to be able to run the newer OSes is OK? That they don't officially support or offer BluRay drives (though there are unsupported work arounds)?

Apple generally supports hardware for at least 5 years with OS updates. With both Apple and Microsoft going to annual OS updates it will be interesting to see how this trend continues. Many with the older Mac Pros that cannot upgrade to Lion or Mountain Lion are probably just as happy staying with Snow Leopard - and Snow Leopard continues to be supported by Apple.

Bottom line is that all hardware and software eventually will become obsolete and Apple & Microsoft generally support their OSes for a similar length of time with outliers like Win Xp and Snow Leopard garnering extended support due to a still large installed base of users. If you do not like these facts that come with your choice of computing environment then you have the choice to not buy any computing hardware/software and save yourself from having "shove s*** down their users' throat [sic]".

It is inferior to Windows 7 with a Keyboard a Mouse and two large wide screen monitors.

End of conversation.

I use Windows 8 a keyboard, a mouse, and with two large wide screen monitors. I use Start8, so I haven't seen the Metro interface in a long time. Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 in many important ways, such as improved storage support, better file management, and better security.

What is improved storage support?, I have yet to find a device that I can not get recognized and working on Windows XP, much less Windows 7. So what improved storage support are you referring to?

What better file management? I'm sorry, I am just not understanding the improvements you are touting here. Better security? We have had to use 3rd party programs to protect our systems from hackers for decades now. I firmly believe that Microsoft is way behind in protecting our systems and the software they provide from people who want in to your system. That being said the improvements in security are probably already made irrelevant simply because the biggest hole in any security system is the user, if they click and allow software to be installed then any other security you have in the system can be overridden.

Microsoft has lost me as a customer. To Apple.Yes, I've had it with MS' endeavour to shove s*** down their users' throat. Win 8 was the last straw. I still have a very expensive gaming PC running on Win7, but my productivity system is a Macbook Air now. I'm done with Microsoft products.

You don't see the irony in that statement? The fact that Apple cuts OS X compatibility after 5 years is OK, but MS providing XP support/security updates for 13 years is bad? That Apple refuses to provide driver/bios/uefi updates for older 64-bit compatible machines (older Mac Pros) to be able to run the newer OSes is OK? That they don't officially support or offer BluRay drives (though there are unsupported work arounds)?

How is Apple not trying to "shove s*** down their users' throat [sic]"? Really?

The new MacPro won't be user upgradable and will cost a ton.

Pricing for the new MacPro has not been announced yet. It will be interesting to see if it does "cost a ton". What if the new Mac Pro starts under $2000? The RAM on the new MacPro can be accessed by the user, however it is unknown if the 2 GPUs can be accessed and upgraded. Also I do not know if the CPU is installed in a ZIF socket or is soldered on the motherboard. One thing for sure is that the preview of the new MacPro has caused quite a stir in the Pro sphere of Mac users.

Normally I would predict M$ would end up like IBM, but M$ seems to be trying to destroy itself on purpose.

So Microsoft has only a 50/50 chance of surviving till 2018.

The fact that I exist and am neither (graduated in '09 with CS and did most of my work on UNIX/Solaris systems back then, and work primarily within Linux nowadays in my career & never worked for Microsoft) would seem to disprove your assertion.